Press release: 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to hear an emergency petition for a Writ of mandamus for expedited Default Judgment against Barack Obama

Posted on | February 27, 2013 | 19 Comments

Press release”

9th circuit Cort of Appeals to hear an Emergency Petition for a Writ of Mandamus for expedited Default Judgment against Barack Obama. Notice of Default was filed a month ago with the US District Court for the Eastern District of California, judge Morrison C. England, who did not issue a Default judgment yet. Brief is posted below. Due to some tampering with the site and difficulty in posting PDF files, Attorney Taitz will post 23 exhibits at a later time. On March 5th Taitz will be in Washington DC to discuss her petition for the Judiciary Committee to hear the issue of Obama’s use of forged IDs and a stolen CT SSN 042-68-4425, which Obama is using, but which failed E-verify. Anyone else with such IDs would be in prison long time ago. We are seeing an unprecedented level of corruption in Judiciary and Congress. Judges are pointed at congressmen. Congressmen are pointing at judges and jointly they are selling the whole nation down the river and committing the most egregious act of treason in the history of this nation. Currently there are 43,000 signatures on petition filed by Attorney Taitz. Large number of clerks and aids for congressmen are acting in the same fraudulent and treasonous manner and refusing to schedule appointments with the congressmen , even when they were given hundreds of documents showing Obama using forged and stolen IDs. Such corrupt federal employees include Kathryn Rexrode, liaison for the Judiciary committee, Erin Newman, scheduling clerk for the Chair of the Judiciary Committee Congressman Bob Goodlatte and many others.   Today Michel Harmon, Chief of Staff for senator Saxby Chambliss, called Attorney Taitz stating that he is refusing to schedule an appointment with the senator on  the issue of Obama’s forged IDs. He attempted to blame the judges. Judges, on the other hand, blame the congress. It might come to a point when exasperated and outraged and livid US citizens will start effectuating citizens arrests of all the officials and employees who are complicit in the cover up of Obama’s forged IDs. Department of Justice is run by an Obama appointee and friend Eric Holder and is rotten from the inside and out. Not one US Attorney has shown any integrity of character to take on the issue of Obama’s use of forged  and stolen IDs. The patience of this nation might be running out.

For more information readers can go to the web site of Attorney Taitz OrlyTaitzESQ.com

Attorney Taitz is working pro bono and donations are appreciated. Paypal and address of Attorney Taitz is listed on her site.

Dr. Orly Taitz ESq

29839 Santa Margarita, Ste 100

Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688

orly.taitz@gmail.com

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

_______________________________________________________

GRINOLS ET AL V ELECTORAL COLLEGE

EMERGENCY PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS

FOR THE DISTRICT COURT TO ISSUE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT BARACK OBAMA AND CONTEMPORANEOUS PETITION FOR A STAY OF ALL OTHER PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE UNTIL THE ISSUE OF THE DEFAULT JUDGMENT IS ADJUDICATED

Lower court case Grinols et al v Electoral College et al 12-cv-2997

U.S. District Court Eastern District of California

Counsel for the Petitioners

Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ

29839 Santa Margarita ste 100

Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688

JURISDICTION

This Court has jurisdiction to entertain this Petition for Writ of Mandamus pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651.

Case at hand originated in the Eastern District of California, which is a part of the 9th Circuit. Petitioner requests that the Court issue the writ under its supervisory power over the inferior federal courts. Hollingsworth v. Perry, — U.S. —, 130 S.Ct. 705, 709-10 (2010).

Certificate of Interested Parties

There are no interested parties

/s/ Dr. Orly Taitz ESQ

Statement of related cases

There are no related cases

/s/ Dr. Orly Taitz ESQ

SUMMARY OF THE CASE AND REQUESTED RELIEF

Plaintiffs herein are Presidential Electors and Presidential Candidates. Barack (Barry) Obama Soebarkah, aka Barack (Barry) Soetoro, aka Harrison (Harry) J. Bounel going under the pseudonym Barack Hussein Obama (Hereinafter “Obama”) is the main defendant in this case, who was sued as an individual, as a candidate for office and who defaulted. Notice of Default and request for Default Judgment is attached herein as Exhibit 1. Answer (or responsive pleading) was due on January 25^th, Obama did not file an answer and defaulted.   In their complaint Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief. Plaintiffs provided the U.S. District Court for the Eastern  Complaint  100 pages of official records, sworn affidavits of senior law enforcement officials and  experts showing that Barack Obama is:

1. A citizen of Indonesia, as listed in his school registration #203 from Franciscan Assisi school in Jakarta, Indonesia. As  a citizen of Indonesia Obama was never eligible and never legitimate for the U.S. Presidency. Exhibit 2
2.  Obama is using last name not legally his. Plaintiffs provided this court with the passport records of Stanley Ann Dunham,  deceased mother   of Barack Obama, showing that he is listed under the last name Soebarkah in her passport (Exhibit 3). As seen in Ms. Dunham’s passport records, her son was removed from her passport in August of 1969 pursuant to the request and sworn statement of Ms. Dunham which was witnessed by the U.S. consul in Jakarta Indonesia. As the requirement for removal as listed in the passport,  is obtaining a foreign allegiance, it is clear that Barack Obama Soebarkah was removed (crossed out) from his mother’s passport  when he obtained his Indonesian passport. Barack Obama cannot serve as a U.S. President as the legal entity Barack Obama does not exist. The only legal entity based on the only verifiable record is Barack Obama Soebarkah.

Obama does not have a valid U.S. birth certificate. Plaintiffs provided affidavits  from Sheriff of Maricopa County Arizona Joseph Arpaio (Exhibit 4), Investigator Zullo (Exhibit 5), experts Felicito Papa (Exhibit 6), Douglas Vogt (Exhibit 7), Paul Irey (Exhibit 8), showing that the image posted by Obama on Whitehouse.gov is a computer generated forgery. When there is a question of authenticity of a document, the only way to authenticate, is to conduct expert evaluation of the original document.  Rule 1003. Admissibility of Duplicates

A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as the original unless a genuine question is raised about the original’s authenticity or the circumstances make it unfair to admit the duplicate.Registrar of the State of Hawaii and Director of Health and Deputy Attorney General of Hawaii in charge of the Health Department were obstructing justice and absolutely refused to comply with any subpoenas and produce the original 1961 birth certificate and as such there was never any authentication of the alleged birth certificate (Exhibit 5). After 4 years of obstruction of Justice, it is clear that the Hawaiian officials have nothing to show and genuine 1961 birth certificate for Barack Obama simply does not exist.

Obama does not have a valid Selective Service certificate. Based on the affidavit of Sheriff Arpaio (Exhibit 4), investigator Zullo (Exhibit 5) and Chief  Investigator of the Special Investigations Unit of the U.S. Coast Guard Jeffrey Stefan Coffman (Ret) (Exhibit 9) alleged copy of Obama’s Selective Service Certificate, is  COMPUTER GENERATED FORGERY.

Plaintiffs submitted with their TRO and complaint the Affidavits of Sheriff Arpaio and Investigator Zullo and as a supplement an affidavit of the Chief Investigator of the Special investigations of the US Coast Guard Jeffrey Stephan Coffman. Based on those affidavits Obama’s alleged application for the selective service is a forgery. According to  5 USC § 3328.every man born after 1959 has to register with the Selective Service and cannot work in the executive branch if he did not register with the selective service.

(a)An individual—

(1)who was born after December 31, 1959, and is or was required to register under section 3 of the Military Selective Service Act (50 App. U.S.C. 453); and

(2)who is not so registered or knowingly and willfully did not so register before the requirement terminated or became inapplicable to the individual,

shall be ineligible for appointment to a position in an executive agency.

As Obama claims to be born in 1961 (without a valid birth certificate we don’t even know when he was born) he had a duty to register with the Selective Service. A forgery does not represent a registration, as such Obama is not eligible to be working in the executive branch of the U.S. government. He is not eligible to be a President in the White House or a janitor in the White House.

1. 3.     Obama’s 2009 tax returns posted by Obama himself on line showed him using a Connecticut Social Security number xxx-xx-4425 (Exhibit 10 Affidavit of Felicito Papa), which failed both E-verify and SSNVS (Exhibit 11, 12). Affidavit of investigator Albert Hendershot (Exhibit 13) provided herein as an exhibit showed it being issued to Harrison (Harry ) J. Bounel, born in 1890 in Russia, immigrant to the United States, presumed to be deceased, whose death was either not reported to the SSA or deleted from the computer system by a treasonous and criminally complicit employee of the SSA. Due to Obama’s use of a stolen SSN he is not eligible to work anywhere in the United States, not in the Federal Branch, not in any other branch, not in the private sector, not even to pick tomatoes or clean toilets. Based on his use of a stolen SSN the only thing Obama is eligible to is at least 18 month prison term and deportation.

Obama was sued as an individual, as a candidate for the U.S. Presidency. Obama was obligated to file an answer or another responsive pleading within 21 days and he was not entitled to use the Department of Justice/ U.S. Attorneys’ office for his  defense on the issue of fraud and use of forged IDs used by him as an individual running for the U.S. President.

Obama failed to file a response. Plaintiffs filed a notice of default and requested a Default judgment from the presiding judge Hon. Morrison England. There are other defendants in the case, however Obama is the main defendant and the case revolves around fraud committed by Obama and use of forged IDs by Obama. Plaintiffs are seeking an Emergency  Writ of Mandamus from this court to the lower court to issue the Default Judgment against the Defendant Obama based on his failure to respond within 21 days as required and stay all other proceedings in the case pending adjudication of the Default judgment against defendant Obama.

HISTORY OF CONTEMPT OF COURT BY OBAMA

In January 2010 an issue of Obama’s eligibility to  the U.S. Presidency was heard in the Administrative Court of Georgia. Presiding Judge in the case denied the motion to dismiss the case and ordered trial. Exhibit 14.  Taitz, who was the counsel in the GA case and the counsel in CA case issued subpoenas for Obama and respective agencies  to produce the original documents. (Exhibit 15 ) Obama filed a motion to quash. Taitz filed an opposition (Exhibit 16). Presiding judge denied the motion to quash (Exhibit 17). Obama sent a letter to the secretary of State of GA demanding to take the case away from the judge. Secretary of State refused (Exhibit 18). Obama was supposed to show up at trial and produce all of the required documents. Obama simply showed contempt of court and never showed up and never presented any documents.

Obama showed unprecedented arrogance and disrespect towards courts and contempt of any court and behavior de facto stating that he is above the law. So, his failure to furnish an answer or a responsive pleading, as required, represents a part of a pattern.

ADDITIONAL REASON AND JUSTIFICATION FOR URGENCY AND FOR GRANTING AN EMERGENCY WRIT OF MANDAMUS

Within days Obama appointee John Brennan is set to be confirmed as a Director of the CIA.   However there is a direct connection between Brennan and Obama’s use of  falsified records. In 2008, when Brennan worked as a director of Analysis  Corp, his employee was caught by the State Department  repeatedly tampering with passport records of Obama. In January 2009 several articles appeared in Newsmax, WND.com quoting prior articles in Washington Times and Washington Post. Exhibit 21. Aforementioned articles argued that this tampering with Obama’s passport records was done for the purpose of “cauterization” of such record from any embarrassing or inconvenient information.  These articles coincided with legal cases brought by an attorney for the Petitioners herein, Taitz. Cases quoted were Lightfoot v Bowen 08A524 in SCOTUS and Keyes et al v Bowen 34-2008-80000096 CU-WM-GDS Superior Court of CA. Both were related cases brought by Taitz on behalf  of the write in vice Presidential candidate for Congressman Ron Paul, Gail Lightfoot, and for the Presidential Candidate former U.N. Ambassador Dr. Alan Keyes.  Both cases questioned Obama’s legitimacy for the U.S. Presidency. In conjunction with Keyes Taitz reached an agreement with the Department of Justice, U.S. Attorneys office for the Eastern District of California. Exhibit 22. This agreement was signed by Taitz and the Assistant U.S. attorney Yahinori Himel on behalf of the U.S. Attorney Lawrence Brown. Stipulation converting subpoena into Touhy  demand based on United States ex rel  Touhy v Ragen (1951) 340 U.S. 462 sought production of the State Department and Justice Department records relating to the tampering with Obama’s passport records, any and all information of what type of specific documents was assessed, individuals involved and specific changes. Taitz believes that ultimately there was pressure asserted on the parties and the court, as the Justice Department did not comply with the stipulation and did not provide information and the presiding judge. The case was   suddenly dismissed, ostensibly as being filed too late, after the November election, while later the higher court denied the appeals, claiming that the case was filed too early, prior to Obama’s confirmation by the Joint session of the U.S. Congress in 2009, which probably meant that the case was filed timely, just right. If one court dismisses the case, claiming it was filed too late and the  higher court dismisses the case claiming it was filed early, it is a sign it was filed at the right time. In the global scheme of things in the past four years there were 45 attorneys and hundreds of pro se plaintiffs who filed legal challenges against Obama. For the past four years different courts and officials were kicking the can and passing the buck and so far not one single court heard the matter on the merits and not one single judge compelled production of the original IDs for Obama in light of the copies being found by law enforcement and experts to be forgeries. Now, not only the legitimacy of the U.S. Presidency is at stake, but also the CIA, National Security and U.S. intelligence community is at stake.

Many in the media, establishment and public are currently in disbelief and denial claiming that it would be impossible for all of the safeguards and all of the checks and ballances to fail and crime of such magnitude not to be stopped in four years.    However, Plaintiffs would like to bring forward an example from the recent history: in 1932 Germany was considered a cultured nation, it had a constitution, a Supreme Court, a Congress called Reichstag, thousands of individuals who called themselves reporters with journalistic integrity and thousands of individuals who called themselves unbiased judges with allegiance to the constitution, justice and the rule of law, yet not single one of them found actions of Adolf Hitler to be unlawful, illegal or unconstitutional.  All the judges in Germany followed the “the judges letters” sent to them by the regime. Based on the experience of the last four years it appears that the U.S. judiciary and establishment are doing the same, following the same marching orders to come up with excuses not to adjudicate on the merits, to keep hiding any original IDs for Obama, if they even exist, and turn a blind eye towards flagrant forgeries and theft of the Social Security number by Obama. Turning a blind eye to flagrantly unconstitutional behavior of Hitler in 1930s led to abuses of 1940s, deprivation of constitutional rights culminated in mass incarcerations and exterminations, and death of 65 million people. the same will happen here if the courts do not exercise their jurisdiction and do not rule. In this case the ruling that is requested, is the Default Judgment.

Former Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court John Marshall stated in Cohens v Virginia (1821)  that not assuming jurisdiction is treason to the constitution.   If the U.S. Judiciary does not exercise its jurisdiction in the case at hand, it will constitute treason not only to the constitution, but also to the United States of America as a whole.

Obama was sued as an individual, he is an attorney (even though his license is no longer active), Obama knew that as an individual he was supposed to hire a private attorney or represent himself  pro se and file an answer within 21 days. Clinton v Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997) serves as a precedent showing that the U.S. President can be sued as an individual and he was required to respond. He did not do so. It is time for the court to issue a Default Judgment, so the parties can proceed with the post judgment discovery and finally get all the original documents. This is the most important matter of the U.S. National security. We have a foreign national usurping the U.S. Presidency with all forged and stolen IDs and the last name not legally his. As such an issue of the default judgment has to be heard immediately and all the other motions in the case should be stayed pending adjudication of this matter. Allowing a foreign national to usurp the U.S. Presidency represents High Treason.

CAN SOETORO, AKA SOEBARKAH, AKA BOUNEL, AKA OBAMA WHO WAS SUED AS A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL, IN HIS CAPACITY AS A CANDIDATE FOR OFFICE, FOR FRAUD COMMITTED AS A CANDIDATE, USE THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE/U.S. ATTORNEYS OFFICE AS A PRIVATE CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY AND AS A PRIVATE PIGGY BANK?

As stated before Obama was sued as an individual, a candidate for office. Not only he was  supposed to file an answer within 21 days, but he was not entitled to use the Department of Justice/ US Attorneys office for his defense.

After Obama did not answer the complaint within 21 days, US Attorneys’ office filed an answer on part of other defendants, who happen to be Federal employees. This answer was filed on a 60 day deadline and Obama was included.

These actions by the Department of Justice, which is run by Obama appointee,  Eric Holder,  are flagrantly unconstitutional and unethical for a number of reasons:

1. U.S. Attorneys’ office is supported by the tax payers and is there to represent Federal employees, who were sued as officials fulfilling their duties and in furtherance of their oath of office. Obama was sued as an individual and his actions not only were not in furtherance of the office, but they were for the purpose of the usurpation of the office of President and undermined any and all legitimacy of the office of the President and Commander in Chief. Not only Obama is not entitled to be represented by the U.S. Attorneys’ office, his use of this office represented a waste of public funds and an embezzlement of public funds and any and all funds wasted by the U.S. Attorneys’ office on defense of Obama, who was sued as a candidate, have to be refunded to the Treasury by both the U.S. Attorneys: Benjamin Wagner and Ed Olsen, who submitted the pleadings and by Obama, who sought to benefit from unlawfully using the U.S. Attorneys office.

2.  Actions by the US attorneys office were flagrantly unethical as there was a clear conflict of interest.

Plaintiffs submit Exhibit 19 a letter from Defendant, member of the Electoral College 2012, Don Ascoli. While U.S. Attorneys Wagner and Olsen represented to the lower court that they represent all federal defendants, including members of the Electoral College, according to Mr. Ascoli, U.S. Attorney’s office never contacted him, he had no idea that the U.S. Attorney’s office filed pleadings on his behalf, and the position taken by the U.S. Attorneys’ office was diametrically opposite from what the alleged client wanted. Mr. Ascoli forwarded the letter and a video clip at link electorial_votes.m4v. While the U.S. Attorneys’ office claimed that the federal defendants did not want a stay of certification of Obama pending adjudication of the issue of his forged IDs, the defendants wanted the opposite, they wanted the adjudication prior to certification. Similarly, a letter received from Senator McCain shows that Senator McCain was not put on notice regarding the evidence and the position of the U.S. Attorneys’ office ( Exhibit 20)   So, the  Department of Justice/  U.S. Attorneys , which is there to protect the public from fraud, from forgery, from the usurpation of the Presidency, was criminally complicit in the cover up, defrauded the clients-Federal Employees, defrauded the Court and defrauded the Nation.   The interests of Obama are clearly opposite from the interests of the Federal Employees and as such the U.S. Attorneys’ office cannot be allowed to file responsive pleadings after Obama already defaulted and also cannot be allowed to represent Obama, who was sued as a candidate for office and act against the interests of the Federal employees.

As such Default by candidate Obama cannot be cured after the fact by the U.S. Attorneys’ office. For a month the lower court did not respond to the Request for the Default Judgment. Due to the enormous threat to the U.S. National Security the Default Judgment has to be entered immediately.

As stated previously, the plaintiffs, who are presidential Electors and Presidential Candidates were deprived of their right to participated in lawful elections, as they were forced to compete against a criminal with forged IDs and his electors. They were completely deprived of their suffrage rights, their 14^th Amendment Equal Protection rights, Honest Service by the election officials and Judiciary, rights. They are entitled to immediate adjudication, issuing of the emergency Writ of Mandamus is warranted ind in the Public interest.

Defendant Obama will not be deprived of any rights by the Writ of Mandamus. He was given an opportunity to file responsive pleadings, he did not do that. Additionally, post judgment hearing can be held, whereby, if he has any valid identifications, he would be able to provide those, if he does not, as some 20 affidavits from top law enforcement officials and experts show, then he never could occupy the position of the U.S. President and one cannot be harmed by losing something that he was never entitled to in the first place.

CONCLUSION AND REQUESTED RELIEF:

Plaintiffs are seeking a Writ of Mandamus stating as follows :

1. Obama was sued as a candidate for the position of the US President, not as a sitting President and was required to answer within 21 days

2. Obama did not answer within 21 days.

3. District court is to issue a Default Judgment at the earliest possible time.

4. Due to evidence presented by the Plaintiffs, showing Obama to be a foreign citizen who ran for the US President using forged IDs, a stolen Social Security number from a state where he never resided and a last name not legally his, this is a matter of the outmost importance for the U.S. National security and has to be decided as soon as possible.

5. As Obama was sued as a candidate for office, he was not entitled to legal representation at the taxpayers’ expense by the US Attorneys’ office. US Attorneys’ office/Department of Justice are not allowed to represent Obama in this case and have to reimburse the taxpayers for the cost of this representation.

6. District Court should investigate actions by the US Attorneys’ office in filing pleadings, claiming to represent the US Congress and US Electoral college and not advising the US Congress and US electoral college of such representation and acting against the best interests of their clients and against the will of their clients.

Respectfully,

/s/ Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ

Certificate of Service is filed as a separate attachment

cc U.S. and International media

cc House Committee on the Judiciary

Congressman Bob Goodlatte -Chairman

2309 Rayburn HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
Phone: (202) 225-5431
Fax: (202) 225-9681

cc Congressman Gregg Harper (R-MS)

Chairman

United State House Administration Subcommittee on Election

307 House Office Building

Washington DC 20515

ph 202-225-5031

fax 202-225-5797

ccGregg Harper, Mississippi, Chairman

Aaron Shock, Illinois

Rich Nugent, Florida

Todd Rokita, Indiana

Bob Brady, Pennsylvania, Ranking Member

Charlie Gonzalez, Texas

cc Congressman Darrell Issa

Chairman

House Oversight Committee

2347 Rayburn House Building

Washington DC, 20515

cc Congressman Mike Rogers

Chairman

House Intelligence Committee

133 Cannon House Office building

Washington DC 20515

cc Congressman Sam Johnson

Chairman

House Subcommittee on Social Security

House Ways and Means Committee

2929 N Central Expy, 240

Richardson, TX 75080

cc Congressman Dana Rohrbacher

Chairman

House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations’

House Committee on Foreign Affairs

2300 Rayburn House Building

Washington DC 20515

US Commission

on Civil Rights

624 Ninth Street, NW

Washington, DC 20425 C

Public Integrity Section

Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Ave, NW

Washington DC 20530-0001

Inter -American Commission on Human Rights

1889 F Street, N.W.. Washington, D.C., 20006 U.S.A..

Tel.: 202-458-6002,     202-458-6002. Fax: 202-458-3992.

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)

Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders

The Honorable Mrs. Margaret Sekaggya

Palais des Nations

CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland

International Criminal bar Hague

BPI-ICB-CAPI

Head Office

Neuhuyskade 94

2596 XM The Hague

The Netherlands

Tel : 0031 (70) 3268070              0031 (70) 3268070

Fax : 0031 (70) 3353531

Email: info@bpi-icb.org

Website: www.bpi-icb.org

Regional Office – Americas / Bureau régional – Amériques / Oficina regional – Américas

137, rue St-Pierre

Montréal, Québec, Canada, H2Y 3T5

Tel : 001 (514) 289-8757              001 (514) 289-8757

Fax : 001 (514) 289-8590

Email: admin@bpi-icb.org

Website: www.bpi-icb.org

Laura Vericat Figarola

BPI-ICB-CAPI

Secretaria Barcelona

laura_bpi@icab.es

Address: Avenida Diagonal 529 1º2ª

08029 Barcelona, España

tel/fax 0034 93 405 14 24

United Nations Commission for

Civil Rights Defenders

Orsolya Toth (Ms)

Human Rights Officer

Civil and Political Rights Section

Special Procedures Division

Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights

tel: + 41 22 917 91 51

email: ototh@ohchr.org

Comments

• Search for:
• Tweet

• EVIDENCE AGAINST OBAMA — YouTube Indiana Trial of Obama !

• EVIDENCE AGAINST OBAMA — Indiana Trial of Obama, 2nd Copy

• Evidence on Barack Obama

  Obama File with Exhibits
  Affidavit of Paul Irey
  Obama file Exhibits 1 - 7
  Obama file Exhibit 8 - Part 1
  Obama file Exhibit 8 - Part 2
  Obama file Exhibits 9-13
  Obama file Exhibits 14-21
  Request for Docs under FOIA and Emergency Motion for Reconsideration
  Exhibits sent to Inspector Generals and Congress

• RSS Feed: Subscribe for Free RSS Feed

  

• ---

  PETITION TO CONGRESS:
  Ban importation of 200,000 Syrian migrants into the US

  

  ---

• Petition the White House to institute Edward Snowden, National Whistleblower – Patriots against Government Corruption Day

  

• URGENT! PLEASE SIGN PETITION TO CONGRESS

• OrlyTaitzEsq.com

  • Look at these pictures of Palestinians at the beach in Gaza. Do they look like starving people? Does it look like genocite?

• TAITZ REPORT

  Subscribe today to stay in touch with our progress. Send this channel out to your email lists. Thank you for your support. CHANNEL (Google Plus) SUBSCRIBE TO YOUTUBE
• 

• Official Facebook

  
  

• Recent Posts

  • Look at these pictures of Palestinians at the beach in Gaza. Do they look like starving people? Does it look like genocite?

• IMPORTANT NOTICES – PLEASE READ!

  Historic DVD Now Available! DVD of the historic trial in GA and DVD of a historic testimony in NH, where evidence was provided showing Obama using a forged birth certificate and a stolen social security number. The DVDs are in a beautiful commemorative case with personal autographs from attorney Dr. Orly Taitz $22.50 each +$2.50 for shipping and handling. --------- To order these DVDs, donate $25.00 by credit card on the website RunOrlyRun.com and email orly.taitz@gmail.com with you name and address. Or send a $25.00 check with your name and address to: Orly Taitz for US Senate 2012, 29839 Santa Margarita ste 100, RSM, CA 92688.

• Advertisement / Sponsors

  
  29839 Sta Margarita Pkwy,
  Ste 100
  Rancho Sta Margarita, CA 92688
  orly.taitz @gmail. com
  (949) 766-7687
  
  
  --------------------------------------
  
  Videography by Barbara Rosenfeld
  --------------------------------------
  
  

  Bumper Sticker
  $9.99 thru PayPal

  --------------------------------------
  
  
  --------------------------------------

  Orly Taitz Photo Collections

  
  

• April 2024

  M	T	W	T	F	S	S
  1	2	3	4	5	6	7
  8	9	10	11	12	13	14
  15	16	17	18	19	20	21
  22	23	24	25	26	27	28
  29	30

• Pages

  • #409755 (no title)
  • …Defendant Obama defaulted in Grinols et al v Obama et al
  • …Grinols Subpoenas
  • ..Grinols Order, Summons, TRO, Complaint
  • .Affidavit of Mike Zullo
  • 1. Judd v Obama
  • 2. Farrar v Obama
  • 3. Taitz v Sebelius
  • 4. Taitz v Indiana, IN Judge Orders Trial
  • 5. Taitz v Astrue
  • 6. Mississippi Filed Complaint Update
  • 7. Taitz Walters v Sec of State Kansas
  • Videos
  • Video: Orly before NH Election Committee